 |
|

03-08-2011, 09:04 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: bold new city of the south
4,481 posts, read 1,200,301 times
Reputation: 4773
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAtheBanker
|
In that price range, I'd get a Canon, Nikon, or Sony small pocket camera. Takes great pictures and is small enough to keep on you at all times. Take a 1000 pictures, and then check out some more expensive cameras after you have some hands-on experience with a digital.
JMO.
|
|

03-08-2011, 09:36 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: East Valley, AZ
3,722 posts, read 3,492,682 times
Reputation: 3570
|
|
|
Here are a few things I've learned in the last 30 minutes of research:
Is it better to have a camera with a rechargeable battery (plug into the wall type) or one with disposable batteries?
What's the difference between an SD and SDHC card? Which one is better, or does it depend on the camera you're getting?
I want image stabilization.
It would be nice to have a camera that takes awesome videos, but it's not a necessity.
One thing I forgot to note in my OP is I'd like to get into photography. I don't really feel like a point-and-shoot type of camera (IE: the ones for $60 or $70) is going to help me acheive this budding hobby. The Fujifilm camera I posted a link to feels like a good step above the generic digital camera, but not quite the $1,000 you can spend on a NICE digital camera for a hobby.
|
|

03-08-2011, 10:02 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: 30% Brighton--60% Grand Rapids 10% on the road
6,103 posts, read 6,029,001 times
Reputation: 3855
|
|
|
How about a nice used Canon G2?
|
|

03-08-2011, 01:50 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Wyoming
5,479 posts, read 5,509,722 times
Reputation: 6600
|
|
|
BATTERIES: I personally prefer the rechargeable batteries because they're smaller and generally last longer, but it's always a good idea to have two batteries -- one as a backup that can be recharging. The batteries are more expensive and require a separate charger (included), so that drives up the camera cost a little. In your price range it can make quite a difference.
AA batteries are bulkier and heavier but available almost anywhere there's a cash register. You can also get rechargeable AAs to cut the cost of buying all the alkaline batteries. Most people seem to have no problem with that, but I've never been able to get them to work as advertised. I've bought at least four chargers and a couple dozen rechargeable AA batteries and never found one that would work properly for use in my electronic flashes. I've given up for now and buy alkaline.
One of the main things that the little rechargeables offer is small size. If you want a really small, thin pocket camera, AAs are pretty much out. Otherwise? Most people who use AAs much get rechargeables and are fine with them.
CARDS: I don't think it makes a bit of difference.
If you want a camera to learn with, get one that offers manual input. (They ALL have auto mode available, but for many that's the only choice you have.) It used to be that most of the Canon A-series cameras offered manual input, but I don't know which do these days. All the A-series use AA batteries and are value priced.
That Canon G-2 mentioned above could be excellent for a beginner, but it is a very old model.
|
|

03-08-2011, 05:13 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Dallas, TX
4,332 posts, read 3,026,633 times
Reputation: 2496
|
|
Rechargeable batteries, hands down. If you care at all about the environment, it's far better for it and frankly it's a lot cheaper to buy two (usually one included, I'd recommend getting a second one too) rechargeable batteries than continuously buying regular batteries, cameras generally suck some power especially if you use the flash.
If you want a great compact with great videos I'd strongly recommend either a Sony HX5V or a Panasonic ZS7 the Panasonic I know only from reviews, but it gets great ones, as well it should, with Leica glass, the Sony I own, and it's very competent as a point and shoot, seeing as the main setting "recognize" what you're taking a picture of and chooses the correct program/settings for you. Both deliver HD video, with the Sony slightly trumping the Panasonic in that department, only downside to the Sony as far as videos go is where they've placed the microphone. If you're willing to go to $200, I certainly wouldn't hesitate throwing on the extra $20 to get one of these.
EDIT: Oh and don't look yourself silly on the various pixel ratings, unless you're printing billboards, anything over 8mp will suffice, given the lens is good.
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|
Similar Threads
-
The "What's New?" Thread: Lenses and Accessories, Photography, 1 replies
-
Lyto - "Light Field" camera, Photography, 6 replies
-
Best Possible Photos From A "Higher-End" Digital Camera?, Photography, 4 replies
-
Weekly Assignment #10: "Three of a Kind ", Photography, 139 replies
-
NEW: Panasonic "Micro four-thirds" camera..., Photography, 5 replies
-
What kind of Camera do you Own?, Photography, 20 replies
|